Original Research
Bringing New Literacies into the Secondary Classroom: A Case Study of Synchronous Collaborative Writing with Google Docs
- Abstract
- Full text
- Metrics
Despite the increasingly widespread adoption of collaborative technology in K-12 writing instruction, little is known about how these new literacy practices shape students’ academic writing experiences with synchronous online collaboration, particularly within the context of long-term curricular integration. Addressing this gap, this study examines middle school students' in-class use of Google Docs for synchronous collaborative writing over the course of a year, exploring how technology reshapes learning experiences and opens new pathways for interaction and literacy practices as suggested by Chapelle (2007). Based on qualitative analyses of multiple data sources—including student and teacher interviews, student reflections, and observations , we examined the perceived affordances and challenges of these new literacy practices, as well as the contextual factors that influence students’ collaborative experiences. Findings revealed several key benefits of synchronous academic writing, including enhanced writing fluidity, reflective verbal composing, and audience awareness, while also revealing challenges such as an overemphasis on efficiency, and tensions over textual ownership. We conclude by emphasizing the pedagogical implications of effectively integrating synchronous collaborative writing into secondary classrooms and beyond.
Page 1 of
Download Count : 19
Visit Count : 49
Keywords
Collaborative Writing; New Literacies; Digital Literacy; Synchronous Online Collaboration; K-12 Digital Writing
Author(s) Information
Publisher’s Note
The claims, arguments, and counter-arguments made in this article are exclusively those of the contributing authors. Hence, they do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the authors’ affiliated institutions, or EUROKD as the publisher, the editors and the reviewers of the article.
Acknowledgements
We thank the teacher and her students who participated in this study, and we are grateful to Dr. Carol Olson and Dr. Joshua Lawrence for providing feedback and insights on earlier drafts. We also extend our appreciation to the undergraduate research assistants who supported interview transcription.
Funding
Not applicable.
CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement
Soobin Yim: Writing – Original Draft, Writing-Review & Editing, Project Administration, Investigation, Methodology, Investigation, Formal Analysis, Data Curation, Conceptualization, Data Curation, Visualization
Mark Warschauer: Writing – Review & Editing, Formal Analysis, Resources, Conceptualization, Supervision
Generative AI Use Disclosure Statement
Generative AI tools were used in the later stages of writing for grammatical refinement, improved flow, and paraphrasing for clarity. ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2025) and Gemini (Google, 2025) were used with prompt keywords related to language-level editing (e.g., proofread, paraphrase, improve clarity and explain your changes). All conceptualization, data analysis, coding decisions, interpretations, and all sections involving original scholarly argumentation were completed entirely by the authors. No AI-generated content replaced human judgment, theoretical framing, or analytic reasoning. All AI-assisted revisions were reviewed, verified, and further edited by the authors to ensure accuracy, fidelity to the data, and alignment with the study’s methodological and ethical commitments. No AI tools were used to analyze data, generate codes, produce results, or create figures, tables, or images.
Ethics Declarations
World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki–Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants
This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. All procedures involving human participants were approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of California, Irvine. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and all data were anonymized to protect participant confidentiality.
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Data Availability
Due to the nature of qualitative research and to protect participant confidentiality, the data including interview transcripts and observations are not publicly available. De-identified data can be provided upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.